JOHN M. BOTTS,

OF VIRGINIA.

JOHN MINOR BOTTS was born in Dumfries, Prince William County, Virginia, on the 16th of September, 1802. His father, Benjamin Botts, was the youngest man engaged in the defence of Aaron Burr, and was then already eminent at the bar. His specialty was courage, nerve,—the "bravest of all possible men," I have heard him described by a contemporary. Losing his parents at the early age of nine, by the memorable conflagration of the Richmond Theatre, in December, 1811, young Botts, then but a child, was left to his own care. He attended various schools until the age of eighteen years, and acquired a knowledge of Greek, Latin, French, and mathematics. He then studied law, entirely under his own direction, and was licensed to practise the profession after a six-weeks' acquaintance with it,—a feat which it is claimed but one other achieved, and that one the immortal orator of the Revolution, Patrick Henry.*

After devoting himself for six years to the practice of the law in Richmond, he became dissatisfied with the confinement it imposed. Purchasing a farm in Henrico County, in 1828, he turned his attention to agriculture, and in a few years became famous for producing the largest crops, acre for acre, of any farmer in the county.

While turning the soil, he did not allow his political sympathies to stagnate. It is recorded that he was the twelfth antiJackson man in Henrico in 1828, and that he was then seized with the desire and intention of revolutionizing the political sentiment of the county, formidable as it was. Five years after, the fruit of his labor and enthusiasm in the Whig cause was

A large portion of this sketch is adopted almost verbatim from material furnished by a capable gentleman, who is intimately acquainted with the subject.

manifested in his return to the State Legislature, (1833,) ir which he sat, by successive re-elections, until 1839; and in the latter year he received the nomination of the Whigs for Congress in a district which had never elected any other than a Democrat since John Marshall* had represented it.

Mr. Botts being regarded as the only adversary whom the Democrats had reason to fear, they selected for his opponent the most popular man of their party in the district, who resigned an official position he then held in the State, and took the stump against Mr. Botts, under the assurance that, if defeated, he should be placed in a better situation in Washington than that he relinquished. In this contest Mr. Botts succeeded, by the handsome majority of over 200 votes! In 1841, he was again triumphantly elected to Congress over the Hon. Wm. H. Roane, whose term in the United States Senate had just expired.

In 1843 the State was re-apportioned and the districts very much enlarged. The Democrats had a large majority in the Legislature, who avowed that their purpose in enlarging the Richmond district was to make it as Democratic as possible, in order to defeat Mr. Botts in the future. They, therefore, struck off two of the four Whig counties that had been represented by him, and added three others, two of which were very largely Democratic, and the other about equally divided. This made the Democratic majority between five and six hundred in the district; but, fearing this might not thoroughly effect their purpose, they proposed to attach another Democratic county to it, which then gave 350 majority, and which was publicly proclaimed on the floor of the Legislature to be the "cap-stone" upon Mr. Botts's political grave, from which he could never rise. His opponent was John W. Jones, afterward Speaker of the House, a gentleman whose great personal and political popularity promised a majority of 1000 votes. In addition to this disadvantage, Mr. Botts had but six weeks to canvass the district. His courage, however, not only did not fail, but received a vital fervor from the odds against him. He met his opponent face to face wherever and whenever possible. He arraigned the Democratic party, and especially the Democratic Legislature, for the

* Afterward the celebrated Chief Justice, and biographer of Washington.

injustice and wrong done to all the rest of the State by its design to punish him for his fidelity to those principles which he believed essential to the welfare of his country. When the election took place, the Democrats were astounded to find their anticipations of a majority dwindled down to 32 votes. A conviction resting on the minds of some that Mr. Botts was actually elected, a public meeting was held, by the voice of which he contested the seat. The Democrats were as powerful in the House of Representatives as in the Legislature of Virginia.

In order, therefore, to avoid the possibility of defeat, they resorted to the extraordinary expedient of electing Jones Speaker of the House, with the contested election hanging over him. Mr. Cave Johnson moved a resolution requiring the committee to which the case was referred to consist of six Democrats and three Whigs, instead of five to four, as had been the uniform custom up to that period. When, at last, Mr. Botts forced this committee into action, and they found from the investigation that there was serious reason to fear for the safety of the Speaker, they reported against him before having gone through one-third of the evidence. When it came before the House, the same apprehension was manifested. The hour-rule was applied, and no entreaty on the part of the Whigs could induce the Democrats to extend the time, so as to allow him to expose the corrupt course the House and committee had pursued toward him.* He went home and took the stump for Mr. Clay, and by his almost unaided efforts he succeeded in revolutionizing the district, which gave that great patriot a majority of about 250.

Mr.

In 1845, just after the defeat of Mr. Clay, the most unparalleled apathy seemed to possess the Whigs over the whole country, the result of which was the Democracy in Congress obtained a majority of 80 in the House of Representatives. Botts was again unanimously nominated by his party for Congress. Mr. Jones declined a re-election, declaring on the floor of Congress that he would rather run against any twenty-five men in the district than meet Mr. Botts. Mr. Sedden, a stranger in the district, was elected, "for the simple reason that the

"Hancock," in the "New York Express," July, 1859.

loss of Mr. Clay's election had carried dismay into every Whig heart, and it was impossible at that time to rally."

The confidence of the party in Mr. Botts was, however, increased; and, in 1847, he was again unanimously called into the contest, and, to the great delight of the Whig party throughout the State and country, he was re-elected to Congress by a majority of 596 votes. Thus was the "cap-stone" removed, and the dead restored triumphantly to life in the short space of two terms.

While Mr. Botts was removing obstructions almost insurmountable, no competitor appeared before him ; but his triumph brought many aspirants forward, all anxious to have him set aside, that their chances for the succession might be equalized. That opportunity was presented in the year 1848, in the memorable contest between the friends of Mr. Clay and Gen. Taylor. The State of Virginia declared in convention for Gen. Taylor, when it was known that the party in the State were for Mr. Clay. Mr. Botts adhered to the fortunes of Mr. Clay until the action of the Philadelphia Convention destroyed the last hope of success. Mortified and grieved by what he considered the folly of the proceeding, as well as the injustice done to the founder of the Whig party, he was slow in coming to the support of Gen. Taylor. But at last he did, and made a speech at Vauxhall Garden, in the city of New York, when, at the request of Mr. Clay himself, he withdrew his name, and urged the numerous Clay organizations in the State to surrender their favorite and rally upon Gen. Taylor. This they did, and thus secured the vote of New York, and the election of Gen. Taylor, as was admitted by the "New York Herald" at the time. The speech of Mr. Botts on that occasion made a profound impression upon the thousands who listened to him, and a visible emotion seemed to thrill every heart. As Mr. Botts closed his speech, the supporters of Gen. Taylor gave vent to their exultation, which the friends of Mr. Clay could not then hear without pain, and they demonstrated their displeasure by hisses. Mr. Botts reminded them of what was staked upon the result, and urged them to be magnanimous. The "New York Tribune" immediately hauled down the Clay banner, and next morning ran up Gen. Taylor's colors, a course which was soon followed by all the Clay adherents in that State.

Those who were secretly opposed to Botts in Virginia managed to get a "Taylor" man in the field for Congress, and by that means the district which Mr. Botts had won from the Democracy fell back to it. His defeat, however, still served to show his popularity among the Whigs. In a three-days' contest the Taylor candidate received but 317 votes, those of Mr. Botts amounting to 2500.

In 1851, he was again unanimously called by the convention of his district to take the field. He reluctantly obeyed. But, satisfied that the causes of the dissensions in 1848 were not yet entirely removed, he subsequently declined the nomination and invited the convention to choose another candidate,—the election having been postponed from May to October. The convention re-assembled and insisted that he should run.

Mr. Botts has been fourteen times, by party conventions, placed before the people, and triumphantly elected ten times out of the fourteen. And when defeated, it took the whole power of the Legislature to overcome him, aided by the lower House of Congress; and then, like Mr. Clay in 1840 and 1843, he was beaten by his own household, whom he had so faithfully served in every trying contest. Since 1851, Mr. Botts has positively refused to allow his name to be presented as a candidate for any office in the State.

His career has been singularly consistent and fearless in the advocacy of what he deemed the best and broadest views of statesmanship. Soon after the Southern Democracy had changed its issue from the tariff to the Slavery question, the Abolitionists at the North began to petition Congress against slavery. This led to the passage of the twenty-first rule, forbidding the reception of such petitions. The denial of this right aroused universal indignation at the North, and the petitions increased a hundredfold. The North resolved upon the abrogation of the rule, and the South threatened a bloody dissolution of the Union as the consequence of its repeal. Mr. Botts came boldly forward and advocated its removal; while a storm of denunciation from friend and foe was poured upon him from every quarter of the South. He saw clearly the necessity of the abrogation, and he defied all injurious constructions placed upon his motives, and persevered until the obnoxious rule was rescinded. The wisdom of his con